This isn't the sort of thing society grows out of. It's the sort of thing that society grows into
Quote of the day
 Our writers |
 |
Celebrate Science, not Christ
Richard Dawkins suggests that the birthday of Isaac Newton on 25th December is a better reason for celebration than the alleged birth date of a, largely, mythical Christ.
HAPPY NEWTON DAY, everybody !
http://richarddawkins.net/article,2026,Happy-Newton-Day,Richard-Dawkins-New-Statesman
Submitted on Sat, 2007-12-15 17:37
Celebration indeed
I'm decorating my Newtontree today. How high should I place the miraculous apple?
Newton's apple
Don't put the apple above head height.
Does Dawkins realise that Newton was an occultist?
Does he care?
No generalisations, please
It's perfectly well-known that Newton was interested in alchemy and wrote extensively on religion. Would you like to cite any particular passage?
No, no, nothing particualr
I just mentioned it. It's not a big deal. Quite interesting actually. WPedia: Isaac Newtons occult studies "Newton was interested in the proportions of the Temple of Solomon given in 1 Kings. He noted that the Temples's measurements given in the Bible math problems related to solutions for π and the volume of a hemispere, V = (2 / 3)πr3....As a Bible scholar Newton was probably initially interested in the "sacred geometry" of Solomon's Temple, but later came to believe that the dimensions and proportions led to more than just golden sections, conic sections, spirals and other harmonious and beautiful constructions[5] they were references to the size of the earth and man's proportion to it and place in it." But I really do not mean anything by this. I am sure Richard Dawkins is absolutely right in all that he says. Merry Christmas and a Happy New Ton. Richard Newton & Intelligent design
"This most beautiful System of the Sun, Planets, and Comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful being. And if the fixed Stars are the centers of other like systems, these, being form'd by the like wise counsel, must be all subject to the dominion of One; especially since the light of the fixed Stars is of the same nature with the light of the Sun, and from every system light passes into all the other systems. And lest the systems of the fixed Stars should, by their gravity, fall on each other mutually, he hath placed those Systems at immense distances from one another.
This Being governs all things, not as the soul of the world, but as Lord over all: And on account of his dominion he is wont to be called Lord God Pantokrator[2], or Universal Ruler. For God is a relative word, and has a respect to servants; and Deity is the dominion of God, not over his own body, as those imagine who fancy God to be the soul of the world, but over servants. The supreme God is a Being eternal, infinite, absolutely perfect; but a being, however perfect, without dominion, cannot be said to be Lord God; for we say, my God, your God, the God of Israel, the God of Gods, and Lord of Lords; but we do not say, my Eternal, your Eternal, the Eternal of Israel, the Eternal of Gods; we do not say, my Infinite, or my Perfect: These are titles which have no respect to servants. The word God usually a [3] signifies Lord; but every lord is not a God. It is the dominion of a spiritual being which constitutes a God; a true, supreme, or imaginary dominion makes a true, supreme, or imaginary God. And from his true dominion it follows that the true God is a Living, Intelligent, and Powerful Being; and, from his other perfections, that he is Supreme or most Perfect. He is Eternal and Infinite, Omnipotent and Omniscient; that is, his duration reaches from Eternity to Eternity; his presence from Infinity to Infinity; he governs all things, and knows all things that are or can be done. He is not Eternity and Infinity, but Eternal and Infinite; he is not Duration and Space, but he endures and is present. He endures forever, and is every where present; and, by existing always and every where, he constitutes Duration and Space. Since every particle of Space is always, and every indivisible moment of Duration is every where, certainly the Maker and Lord of all things cannot be never and no where. Every soul that has perception is, though in different times and in different organs of sense and motion, still the same indivisible person. There are given successive parts in duration, co-existent parts in space, but neither the one nor the other in the person of a man, or his thinking principle; and much less can they be found in the thinking substance of God. Every man, so far as he is a thing that has perception, is one and the same man during his whole life, in all and each of his organs of sense. God is the same God, always and everywhere. He is omnipresent, not virtually only, but also substantially; for virtue cannot subsist without substance. In him b [3] are all things contained and moved; yet neither affects the other: God suffers nothing from the motion of bodies; bodies find no resistance from the omnipresence of God. 'Tis allowed by all that the supreme God exists necessarily; and by the same necessity he exists always and every where. Whence also he is all similar, all eye, all ear, all brain, all arm, all power to perceive, to understand, and to act; but in a manner not at all human, in a manner not at all corporeal, in a manner utterly unknown to us. As a blind man has no idea of colours, so have we no idea of the manner by which the all-wise God perceives and understands all things. He is utterly void of all body and bodily figure, and can therefore neither be seen, nor heard, not touched; nor ought he to be worshipped under the representation of any corporeal thing. We have ideas of his attributes, but what the real substance of anything is we know not. In bodies, we see only their figures and colours, we hear only the sounds, we touch only their outward surfaces, we smell only the smells, and taste the savours; but their inward substances are not to be known, either by our senses, or by any reflex act of our minds; much less then have we any idea of the substance of God. We know him only by his most wise and excellent contrivances of things, and final causes; we admire him for his perfections; but we reverence and adore him on account of his dominion. For we adore him as his servants; and a God without dominion, providence, and final causes, is nothing else but Fate and Nature. Blind metaphysical necessity, which is certainly the same always and every where, could produce no variety of things. All that diversity of natural things which we find, suited to different times and places, could arise from nothing but the ideas and will of a Being necessarily existing. But, by way of allegory, God is said to see, to speak, to laugh, to love, to hate, to desire, to give, to receive, to rejoice, to be angry, to fight, to frame, to work, to build. For all our notions of God are taken from the ways of mankind, by a certain similitude which, though not perfect, has some likeness, however. And thus much concerning God; to discourse of whom from the appearances of things, does certainly belong to Natural Philosophy." (Isaac Newton, General Scholium to The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy) Newton's god
bluejay, That's a rather nice piece of prose from SIr Isaac. You will notice a complete absence of the Christmas fairy tale. I suppose Newton would be too modest, and too afraid of the consequences, to have suggested that his scientific achievements were more important than the Jesus myth, but you can join with me in saying, Celebrate Science, not Christ!' it seems isaac is a beleiver
if iam not mistaken from my fast reading to what he wrote, that will give me assure to my knowledge that the most smart and knowledgable and scinetific people are much beleivers in God than others. They can see his manifistation and his gifts, so eric even if isaac didnt celibrate christ, but he knows God and that is an important issue as you admire and celebrate science only. better to know God also from science if you have scientific mind. wishing you good celebration of what u like as it is up to u to choose. Yes, Newton was a believer
Yes, Abdulksaida, the greatest scientist of all times, Sir Isaac Newton, was a believer, a Christian (secretly a Unitarian), a Creationist, a Platonist, and a lay theologian. The Principiae was originally meant by him to be one volume in a four volume work, whose purpose was to prove the Creator, by means of the Creation. Newton, however, was discouraged from completing his life work, due to opposition bordering upon persecution, which opposition came not from the Churches, but from other scientists, who were envious of his genious. They even denied him employment in the schools! The greatest scientist of all times, denied a right to teach science, by the other scientists!!!! If the British Crown had not offered Sir Isaac Newton a job as warden of the British mint, Newton would have died in embitered poverty. For the next Christmas I will go to London, and on Christmas Eve I will go to Westminster Cathedral, where Newton is buried. Wherein I will celebrate Queen Anne for patronizing this great man, and the English church, for granting him a resting place. What I will do this coming Christmas eve is none of Eric's business. Though watching my daughter open her christmas presents will surely take up much more of my time & attention, than the mean-spirited, intolerant and mendacious polemics of that popularizing second-rate, Richard Dawkins. Merry Christmas everybody, Merry Christmas Abdulksaida, peace be to all people of good will, just ignore the others and don't forget to give something to the street people, next time you see them standing at a red light. Newton versus the Atheists
From "A Short Scheme of the True Religion." (Quoted in Brewster, Sir David, Memoirs of the Life, Writings, and Discoveries of Sir Isaac Newton. 2 vols. Edinburgh, 1850)
Opposite to godliness is atheism in profession and idolatry in practice. Atheism is so senseless and odious to mankind that it never had many professors. Can it be by accident that all birds, beasts, and men have their right side and their left side alike shaped (except in their bowels); and just two eyes, and no more, on either side of the face; and just two ears on either side of the head; and either two forelegs or two wings or two arms on the shoulders, and two legs on the hips, and no more? Whence arises this uniformity in all their outward shapes but from the counsel and contrivance of an author? Whence is it that the eyes of all sorts of living creatures are transparent to the very bottom, and the only transparent members in the body, having on the outside a hard transparent skin and within transparent humors, with a crystalline lens in the middle and a pupil before the lens, all of them so finely shaped and fitted for vision that no artist can mend them? Did blind chance know that there was light and what was its refraction, and fit the eyes of all creatures after the most curious manner to make use of it? These and suchlike considerations always have and ever will prevail with mankind to believe that there is a Being who made all things in his power, and who is therefore to be feared.
Sir Isaac Newton: Christ is my Saviour
Eric_5: You will notice a complete absence of the Christmas fairy tale
"God made and governs the world invisibly and has commanded us to love and worship him, and no other God; to honor our parents and masters, and love our neighbors as ourselves; and to be temperate, just, and peacable; and to be merciful even to brute beasts. And by the same power by which he gave life at first to every species of animals he is able to revive the dead, and has revived Jesus Christ our Redeemer, who has gone into the heavens to receive a kingdom and prepare a place for us, and is next in dignity to God and maybe worshipped as the Lamb of God, and has sent the Holy Ghost to comfort us in his absence, and will at length return and reign over us, till he has raised up and judged all the dead; and then he will give up his kingdom to the Father and carry the blessed to the place he is now preparing for them, and send the rest to places suitable to their merits..." (Isaac Newton, Unpublished manuscript, quoted in Brewster, op cit., Vol. II, p.354) Apparently Richard Dawkins failed to read Newton before turning him against Christianism.Sir Isaac to Richard Dawkins
Sir Isaac Newton to Richard Dawkins: Merry Christmas, asshole.
Dear Bluejay,Is Eric the
Dear Bluejay, Is Eric the happy asking us to celebrate Newton's personal spiritual beliefs or his contributions to science? I don't see why you would feel the need to advise Abdulksaida to "ignore the others" Maybe you can explain that to me, maybe not.. but you must think she has cause to be upset about something. Doesn't everyone? Ignoring someone in order to cope with being offended in this environment is a way of stating that only praise is allowed by that individual or others in a discussion. Don't you think so? That must be what you are trying to say and in agreement with- and since she only discusses Islam here I am guessing that you feel that subject is off limits to any real debate. This is such a strange discussion site. People are so afraid of disagreements here. Merry Christmas to you and your family Bluejay. isaac beleive in one God
i know now that issac is a beleiver which means beleiving in one God, as all knows their is little difference between christianity and islam in the oness of God as we believe jesus (pbuh) is the noble prophet of God as others prophet and as mohamed (pbuh). i dont know why my imagination went to think , if may be issac has the opportunity to read about islam or read Quran and try to understand it scientifically and not emotionally , may be he will imbrace islam, or at least he will be neutral and say the good things of it . it is written in Quran that the most people in the earth who beleive in God and fear him are scientists, even if they or we dont know really their relegions , it is inside their hearts and only God knows it. many claiming to be muslims, jewish , christians and non of them are real muslims or jewish or even christinas, they are very far away from the pure message of their relegion. i respect many westerns whom say the truth even if they dont follow the relegion of islam or say good about prophet mohamed (pbuh) e.g George Bernard Shaw said: " i have always held the religion of Muhammad in high estimation becasue of its wonderful vitality. It is the only releigion which appears to possess that assimilating capability to the changing phases of existence which make itself appeal to every age. I have prophesized about the faith of Muhammad that it would be acceptable tomorrow as it is beginning to be acceptable to the Europe of today. Medieval ecclesiastics, either through igonorance or bigotry, painted Mohammedanism in the darkest colours . They were, in fact, trained to hate both the man Muhammad and his religion. To them, Muhammad was an anti-Christ. I have studied him, the wonderful man, and in my opinion, far from being an anti-Christ, he must be called the Savior of humanity.". also the German poet, Wolfgang Gothe, said:" i looked into history for a human paradigm and found it to be in Muhammed." by the way we as muslims finished these days our celebration of Eeed al adha after pilgrimage and even though Mohamed (pbuh) is the last prophet and loved him as jesus(pbuh) and other prophets, but we dont celebrate his birthday and consider it as a big celebration as eed. Their are very minor differences between islam and christianity, i like one muslim scholar say that christians know 90% e.g of the truth, add some more to what they beleive and they will reach 100% of the truth. Only add "Muhammad" to your list of Messengers and the Holy Quran to your revealed books so they will hold the whole truth instead of a part of it. God says in the Holy Quran guding Muslims how to deal with non-Muslims, " Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching, and argue with them in ways that are best." ( Al-Nahl:125). best celebrations for all Peace to men of good will, ignore men of ill will
Dear Candace
Is Eric the happy asking us to celebrate Newton's personal spiritual beliefs or his contributions to science?
don't see why you would feel the need to advise Abdulksaida to "ignore the others" Maybe you can explain that to me, maybe not.. but you must think she has cause to be upset about something. Doesn't everyone?
My full recommendation was: peace to all people of good will, just ignore the others. The recommendation, a customary one to make at Christmas time, was not addressed at Abdulksaida alone. In even plainer English what it meant was: peace to all people of good will (irrespective of race, gender, nationality, creed, etc), just ignore people of ill will. Tis the season to be jolly, is it not, not the season to get irritated at jackasses.
Ignoring someone in order to cope with being offended in this environment is a way of stating that only praise is allowed by that individual or others in a discussion. Don't you think so? That must be what you are trying to say and in agreement with- and since she only discusses Islam here I am guessing that you feel that subject is off limits to any real debate.
Methinks you are trying to evade a free discussion of the relationship of science and religion (the theme implied in Eric's demand that we celebrate Newton, not Christ), by means of a defamatory allegation of intolerance against me. One can certainly discuss Islam. I'm not sure a thread dedicated to Christ and Newton is the best place to do so, as neither was Muslim. I have not seen much discussion of Islam in the rest of this site, however. What I have seen is a long campaign of harassment, put-down and insult, waged by a certain Brendan_2, against Ms Abdulksaida. Ignoring him - and all others who substitute personal attack, insult and slander to the free & honest exchange of opinion - certainly seems like a reasonable - and moderate - option to me.
Merry Christmas, Dear Candace.
And remember everybody: an apple a day will keep the dentist away
(When the apple hits you over the head, however, the mediocrities are all over you. Long Live Queen Anne!)
Facts
Pointing out inconvenient facts is not harassment, put-down or insult. It is the purpose set out for this site. The option of replying to these facts in good 'faith' is always open, which would involve admitting the truth and proceeding from there to discussing or debating what can be done to remedy these rather obvious problems.
We know more than Newton
The reason we celebrate Newton is that he laid foundations on which scientific progess could be built. The expression of conventional religious opinions is no reason to celebrate him at all. These opinions were the result of living before Darwin provided some of the answers Newton didn't have and out of fear, no doubt, of persecution. Anyway, well done, Bluejay for digging up these lovely pieces of prose.
.
Dear Bluejay,
Methinks you are trying to evade a free discussion of the relationship of science and religion (the theme implied in Eric's demand that we celebrate Newton, not Christ), by means of a defamatory allegation of intolerance against me.
you thinks so? o Christ worshiper poem
Religion
kimmy I find these discussions very useless. Christmas was a Pagan celebration. As an example; the Yule log was from Denmark where they celebrated Jul, which was a Pagan celebration. If you are a Christian or a Muslim looking for support of your religion, you get them from me. Just don't cram them down my throat. I have a lot of friends who are Christians and Muslims. Almost all of them know that I am an atheist. I have no problems with their views, just like they have no problems with my views. We talk. We discuss. We accept. Where is the problem with the rest of the world. Please no Zionist views, and no GOP political views. They don't talk. They don't discuss. They don't accept. This life we are told is
This life we are told is indeed a test They had the same message, Allah is one David, Jesus, Abraham, Moses and more After these Prophets had passed away Another Prophet Allah would send A madman, a poet, a magician or what Muhammed the truthful, was indeed sincere The message was beautiful and so pure The prophet himself could not read or write In Ramadan the whole Quran was recited and said The Quran is now for all mankind a guide, No more idols or lords we should erect We should pray Salah like the prophet taught We must fast in the whole month of Ramadan Ramadan is a month Muslims eagerly await Some of our wealth we give to those in need To visit the Kabaah, the house of Allah The rich, the poor, the black and the white To always be good and honest we must try We will be asked about the life we spent No more guides or prophets will be sent again For all mankind and forever more There are millions of Muslims in the world today
Religion
kimmy 
skeptic griggsy Fr. Griggs
skeptic griggsy Fr. Griggs rests in his Socratic ignorance and humble naturalism. He might be wrong! Dawkins is right to recognize a great scientist on his birthday than Yeshua who took over Mithra's. Newton was also a quack but that does not diminish his role in paradoxically showing no need to posit God behing the laws of motion- no angels in addtion to those laws. Another paradox is that we can use Ockham's Razor - the cleric's heuristic rule- against the need to employ God- He requires ad hoc explanations and contrary to that shalllow bloke, Alister McGrath, that redundancy adds nothing to knowledge. Now that other shallow bloke Richard Swinburne tries to say that God is a simpler hypothesis than causalism- natural causes, but that shows a misuse of the Razor apply to the theory which uses fewer explanations rather than simply the simpler theory as Einstein's is more complex than Newton's, explaining more. How can theists say their god is not a god of the gaps but has a role in explanaion when if He explained anyhting ,He would have to effect it to do so! Theists do not realize the implications of their buffooner1 They do beg questions! |
|
Go Read...Elections |
Posts: 1307
Joined: 2003-05-03